Why Family Offices Should Publish More Than They Do

The default posture of family offices toward public communication has been institutional silence for as long as there have been family offices. The case for the silence is well understood. It reduces inbound noise, maintains operational flexibility, and limits the kinds of information leakage that can erode the discretion that family office work depends on. The case is real but it is also, in my view, an artifact of conditions that have meaningfully changed.

What has changed in the conditions

The talent the most ambitious family offices are now competing for is talent that has spent its career in institutions that publish. The peer networks that the offices increasingly draw on operate, in part, through the shared knowledge that published work produces. The intellectual reputation that influences which co-investment opportunities reach which offices is increasingly built through the published work of the office's principals and senior investment professionals.

An office that maintains complete institutional silence is, in the current environment, accepting talent and opportunity costs that the previous environment did not impose. The costs are not always visible at the office level because they show up as the absence of opportunities rather than as concrete losses, but they are real.

What a thoughtful publishing posture looks like

A thoughtful publishing posture for a family office does not require the office to compromise the discretion its work depends on. It does require the office to make deliberate choices about which categories of intellectual work it will share publicly, which staff will represent the office in those publications, and how the published work will be coordinated with the office's other communications. The choices are non-trivial but they are well-precedented at offices that have already moved in this direction.

The offices that have made the move successfully have generally found that the talent and opportunity benefits exceed the operational costs by a meaningful margin. The benefits compound over time as the published work builds the kind of intellectual reputation that, in any field, takes years of accumulated public engagement to establish.

What the next generation should consider

The next generation of family office leadership will face the publishing question with even less of the conditions that justified historical silence intact. The talent expectations will be more pronounced. The peer network dynamics will be more demanding. The intellectual reputation effects will be more visible. The next generation will benefit, in my view, from settling on a more deliberately visible posture earlier rather than later.

Silence has been the default for institutional reasons that the current environment has substantially eroded. The reflexive maintenance of the silence in conditions that no longer warrant it is, in any institutional category, the recipe for the kind of slow obsolescence that the previous generation could not see coming.

Related reading: The Open Office Was Always a Mistake. The Hybrid Era Is the Apology., The Allocation Shift Inside Family Offices That Practitioners Are Whispering About and Mass Timber Is Quietly Becoming a Real Answer to the Housing Supply Problem.